ROFL You forget that the “transubstantiation” stuff came after those church fathers? I do believe it wasn’t until the Council of Trent in 1551 that it was even defined what it was. If I remember right it wasn’t until Hildebert de Lavardin, Archbishop of Tours in 1133 or something that it was even spoken of. That’s not to say that there were not those before who may have believed such but surely there was no unanimous consent. I simply pointed out a few who did NOT believe the changing of bread into flesh but knew it to be “representation”, “spiritual”, “antitypes”, “metaphor” and “figurative”.
LOL, anyone who knows anything about Church History knows that doctrines aren’t fully defined until they are attacked in some way.
by this way of thinking, Jesus did not become divine until the Council of Nicea.......hmmm, come to think of it, that is just what the Jehovah Witnesses teach!
for everyone who it is claimed thought the Eucharist to be figurative, i posted quotes showing they held no such beliefs.
when Ignatius rights in late first century, early second century that the Eucharist is the flesh of Jesus Christ, that’s transubstantiation in everything but the term.
i love when Catholic Church Fathers are quoted somehow against the Catholic Faith, when these same posters deny baptismal regeneration taught by these same Fathers they are quoting. isn’t it ironic?